Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Toadmaster

Chicken soup is awesome stuff

Recommended Posts

I'm recovering from a gallstone, so have eaten little over the past 3-4 days. I had a bowl of Campbells Chicken Noodle Soup and it seemed like the most amazing thing in the world.

 

I literally felt like this afterwards. 

 

 

 

Campbells should totally do a commercial based on this scene. 😊

 

 

Edited by Toadmaster
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A friend of mine calls it the Brasso Movie, as they were all in dull armour until Lancelot shows up, then they are in shiny armour, as though Lancelot brought a case of Brasso.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, it gets pretty beat up for historical inaccuracy, but it is still one of my favorite fantasy movies right next to Arnie's Conan the Barbarian.

 

Seems like there should be a Very Boorman edition of Pendragon complete with an armor polishing skill. 😊    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As to historic accuracy, casting the knights of the round table as Harley-Davidson riding bikers would have been better than that use of costumes. Monty Python's take on the Arthurian mythos had way better props (except, maybe, the horses).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Toadmaster said:

Yeah, it gets pretty beat up for historical inaccuracy, but it is still one of my favorite fantasy movies right next to Arnie's Conan the Barbarian.

Agreed.

Hope you are feeling better, by the way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone who expects historical accuracy from Excalibur is beyond help. It’s based on a fantasy novel written by a rogue knight in the Middle Ages, a thousand years after the period it’s set.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, simonh said:

Anyone who expects historical accuracy from Excalibur is beyond help. It’s based on a fantasy novel written by a rogue knight in the Middle Ages, a thousand years after the period it’s set.

Come now. If you have access to "ancient texts", then anything is possible!

SDLeary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, simonh said:

Anyone who expects historical accuracy from Excalibur is beyond help. It’s based on a fantasy novel written by a rogue knight in the Middle Ages, a thousand years after the period it’s set.

The Artus myth is older, and has cropped up peripherically in early medieval romances and poetry. I've read Mallory's novel, and it remains silent on the visuals I find so disturbing. It affects me way worse than Kenneth Brannagh's Hamlet interpretation or DiCaprio as Romeo, and I found both of those rather distanced from my expectations and associations with the subject.

 

To me, Le Morte D'Arthur simply is not the defining piece of literature for the Arthurian myth. It may be the oldest prose text, but it feels like a Catholic Saint vita compared to an earlier myth, a washed out version. And the movie continues this reduction even further, without offering any hint of re-interpretation that might validate the re-theming.

A movie about Mallory's "creative process" with cut scenes to the myth would be interesting. Excalibur is just cheese.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A documentary about the history of the myth? I’d watch that, but hardly cinematic.

A historically accurate drama about Romano-Briton warlord set on the 5th/6th century? It’s been attempted, not entirely satisfactorily.

A straight telling of the myth of Arthur, embracing it as mythology? That’s Excalibur. The above are not the story.They are stories about the story. One is a story about the writing of the story. The second is a story about the historical basis of the story.

Excalibur is an attempt to tell the story of Arthur, King of the Britons who lead the Kinghts of the Round Table. It’s the actual thing, and the best attempt at it so far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, simonh said:

A documentary about the history of the myth? I’d watch that, but hardly cinematic.

No, a two-tiered story telling the life history of Sir Mallory (which is interesting enough to warrant a movie), and pieces of the story he wrote as he may have seen it. Which might mean scenes of Tudor era folk cosplaying the Arthurian epoch.

I realize that much of this would be in retrospective, but movies like that have been made with some commercial success.

1 hour ago, simonh said:

A historically accurate drama about Romano-Briton warlord set on the 5th/6th century? It’s been attempted, not entirely satisfactorily.

True, but I prefer fake Sarmatian riders under a dragon banner over cheesy reproductions of 17th century armor.

1 hour ago, simonh said:

A straight telling of the myth of Arthur, embracing it as mythology? That’s Excalibur.

Sorry, but IMO Disney did a better job using T.H.White's book for its adaptation. It does feature on Arthur becoming king rather than being king and added in all manner of children's book stuff, but it did get the story of the unwilling orphan becoming king quite well.

1 hour ago, simonh said:

The above are not the story.They are stories about the story. One is a story about the writing of the story. The second is a story about the historical basis of the story.

Excalibur is an attempt to tell the story of Arthur, King of the Britons who lead the Kinghts of the Round Table. It’s the actual thing, and the best attempt at it so far.

I shudder to think of other attempts being more jarringly counter-immersive than that.

I don't think that Le Morte D'Arthur works well without having it grounded in Mallory's context. Just like other parts of the Grail saga work best within the framework of troubadour knights of the  11th and 12th century. (Not a big fan of the Wagner grail adaptations story-wise, even though he was one of the greatest Fantasy/Mythic Theme authors of his time. Interesting music, however.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/23/2018 at 8:18 AM, soltakss said:

Agreed.

Hope you are feeling better, by the way.

 

I am, thank you. I credit the chicken soup, and really must remember to thank Sir Percival for going on a quest to bring it to me. 😊

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, simonh said:

Excalibur is an attempt to tell the story of Arthur, King of the Britons who lead the Kinghts of the Round Table. It’s the actual thing, and the best attempt at it so far.

Agreed. I can certainly understand the picking at the movies anachronisms, but think that misses a key point. Arthur is a legend, and Excalibur is a fantasy tale. It makes no pretense that it is a historical work.     

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/22/2018 at 3:00 PM, soltakss said:

A friend of mine calls it the Brasso Movie, as they were all in dull armour until Lancelot shows up, then they are in shiny armour, as though Lancelot brought a case of Brasso.

I think it was Playboy that gave it an "award" when it came out: "Clumsiest sex scene in a movie".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Flesh Man said:

Compared to what? First Knight, King Arthur: Legend of the Sword ?

Yeah, that's thing thing about Excalibur. It might not be the best movie every made, but it is probably the best King Arthur movie ever made. There's not much out there to challenge it. Maybe the Richard Harris musical Camelot, if you are into musicals, but practically every other King Arthur movie is total garbage.

 

BTW< I kinda agree that Mallory is a washed down version of the older Celtic tale, but it's also the most popular, interpretation of the tale. Kinda like Frank Miller's take on Daredevil. I prefer the older version, but the Miller version caught on.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Yeah, that's thing thing about Excalibur. It might not be the best movie every made, but it is probably the best King Arthur movie ever made. There's not much out there to challenge it. Maybe the Richard Harris musical Camelot, if you are into musicals, but practically every other King Arthur movie is total garbage.

Like I said - compared to Disney's adaptation of T.H.White, in my opinion Excalibur loses big time with their choice of visuals. That bad and jarring. If they are going for non-period dress, almost everything would have been better.

No Arthurian movie at all would have been better than Excalibur, as far as I am concerned - keeping company with Mel Gibson's "Signs". reEven 100 years war gear would have been preferable. A bollywood version might actually be better.

The Camelot musical wasn't bad when watched as a 10-year-old. By the time Excalibur hit the screen, I had passed twenty, and the imagery didn't manage to touch the residual ten-year-old inside me at all.

But then, I read numerous bad adaptations of Arthurian myths during that time, too, marketed as fantasy.

2 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

BTW< I kinda agree that Mallory is a washed down version of the older Celtic tale, but it's also the most popular, interpretation of the tale. Kinda like Frank Miller's take on Daredevil. I prefer the older version, but the Miller version caught on.

I guess that's my main beef.

While late Iron Age, the core stuff of the Arthurian cycle is perfectly Gloranthan. The Provencale stuff is slightly off. The Malory version is a product of the Rose Wars era. It is an important milestone in English literature, and it may be the most popular in British and US reception, but to me it is loaded with as much unnecessary baggage as the Wagner interpretation of the Nibelungs is with the late Roman Iron Age historical and mythical material at its roots.

Greg's Pendragon rpg suffers from feudalism as the economic and loyalty model. Without that, it might serve the Late Iron Age period quite well, and the Pendragon Pass rules (that were published in one of the Enclosure convention books) did the Dragon Pass Resettlement adaptation quite well, showing how it would work with a clan(sippe-based society of the Late Roman Iron Age on the fringes of the fading empire. That's the Arthurian cycle in my mental vision. The Grail Quest as a marginal Christian veneer over the Mabinogion cauldron quest. Maybe not at home in Dragon Pass, but quite possible in the Theyalan/Malkioni overlap areas.

There used to be a TV series - I think by BBC - which was broadcast in German TV around 1975, which had Arthur and his companions as a gang of just post-adolescent brigands fighting the Jutes of Kent, IIRC. I was around 10 years old when I saw that, but it did wonders to my perception of Arthurian myth (and I had a hefty dose of T.H.White through the Disney or musical lenses before).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Joerg said:

Like I said - compared to Disney's adaptation of T.H.White, in my opinion Excalibur loses big time with their choice of visuals.

Wow! I though the Sword in the Stone was cute for kids but a lousy King Arthur film. I don't care much for White either. Arthur the Social Worker who is pushing for reform and self government. I can understand it. The historical Arthur isn't what modern people would consider to be a great ruler. He means well but he's moody, rash, and autocratic. Which is what Kings were like. He was just less so than most . 

 

 

59 minutes ago, Joerg said:

I guess that's my main beef.

While late Iron Age, the core stuff of the Arthurian cycle is perfectly Gloranthan. The Provencale stuff is slightly off. The Malory version is a product of the Rose Wars era. It is an important milestone in English literature, and it may be the most popular in British and US reception, but to me it is loaded with as much unnecessary baggage as the Wagner interpretation of the Nibelungs is with the late Roman Iron Age historical and mythical material at its roots.

I get it. You'd like a more 5th Century Iron Age, Less High Middle Ages Arthur. You could do that in Pendragon-especially in the earlier editions, but Mallory is sort of the default. It wouldn't a bad idea if the did a supplement with variant King Arthurs (Romanized Celt, Celtic Mythic Hero, etc.) for Pendragon similar to what GURPS did. The problem is, most people want and expect Knights, Chivalry and all that sort of stuff. So thats how most games and films handle it.

 

Keep in mid though that just because you don't like the Chivalric version doesn't mean that Excalibur is necessarily bad for going that route. King Arthur is a legendary character. he may have been based on a real person( he probably was based on several real people) but there is nothing wrong out out of place about the medieval trappings. It's not like he's Julius Caeser or something. Do you get upset that Superman doesn't use phone booths anymore? The updated the character to modern times. That's what Mallory did. It just that we today stopped modernized King Arthur because we today believe in self government and don't want a dictatorial ruler (even a benevolent one) telling us what to do. So he became a period character. 

 

59 minutes ago, Joerg said:

 

There used to be a TV series - I think by BBC - which was broadcast in German TV around 1975, which had Arthur and his companions as a gang of just post-adolescent brigands fighting the Jutes of Kent, IIRC. I was around 10 years old when I saw that, but it did wonders to my perception of Arthurian myth (and I had a hefty dose of T.H.White through the Disney or musical lenses before).

Maybe that's what the problem is. You are expecting Arthur to be that. Frankly it doesn't seem like it would be good to me (Camelot 90210?), and that is was targeted towards your age group at the time. Wonder if you would like it if you saw it now. There were a lot of shows that I liked whenI was ten that I'm not so fond on now-even  somewhat embarrassed about(Man From Atlantis- at least the pilot still holds up)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Joerg said:

There used to be a TV series - I think by BBC - which was broadcast in German TV around 1975, which had Arthur and his companions as a gang of just post-adolescent brigands fighting the Jutes of Kent, IIRC. I was around 10 years old when I saw that, but it did wonders to my perception of Arthurian myth (and I had a hefty dose of T.H.White through the Disney or musical lenses before).

Oooohhh... I think that played a bit here in the US. Thats the one where he is literally fighting everyone else, Saxon or Brit, yes?

If it is.... That is really one of the ONLY Brit productions that have made it here to the US that has put me off. Even the earlier Doctor Who stuff wasn't anywhere near as bad (and I am an Arthurian and I don't like the Doctor).

SDLeary

And I just looked it up. And that somewhat explains why it was ...drek. Not BBC, but HTV. 

Edited by SDLeary
Lookup info

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although I enjoyed "The Sword and the Stone" I, too, found T. H. White's "The Once and Future King" unsatisfying.  Arthur came across as a naval-gazing wuss.  Victor Canning's "The Crimson Chalice" and Mary Stewart's Merlin series were interesting takes  on a post-Roman Britain Arthur. I didn't care for Stewart making Mordred a sympathetic victim of fate.  But Mallory's version, especially the new king's battles with giants and the Roman emperor, is the one that's sticks with me.  Once Arthur is finally settled on his throne he becomes a bit player in his own story.  The focus shifts to Tristram, sort of The Lone Ranger of knightly set.

A movie that could capture the brio of young Arthur adventuring to prove himself to his rivals and subjects would find me an eager viewer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, seneschal said:

Although I enjoyed "The Sword and the Stone" I, too, found T. H. White's "The Once and Future King" unsatisfying.  Arthur came across as a naval-gazing wuss.  Victor Canning's "The Crimson Chalice" and Mary Stewart's Merlin series were interesting takes  on a post-Roman Britain Arthur. I didn't care for Stewart making Mordred a sympathetic victim of fate.  But Mallory's version, especially the new king's battles with giants and the Roman emperor, is the one that's sticks with me.  Once Arthur is finally settled on his throne he becomes a bit player in his own story.  The focus shifts to Tristram, sort of The Lone Ranger of knightly set.

A movie that could capture the brio of young Arthur adventuring to prove himself to his rivals and subjects would find me an eager viewer.

 

I think a proper King Arthur movie would have to be multiple movies. It would lend itself well to a quality mini-series HBO / Netflix style or more properly the BBC.

I think attempts showing a more historically correct post roman era Arthur tend to fail as they are generally not historically accurate so annoy purists, and they lack the image of knights which most casual movie goers seem to expect.

The huge variety of "correct" is a serious issue for having success with a movie, Once & Future King, Mallory, Mists of Avalon, Stewart's Merlin series, various historical accounts most of which have fairly serious differences from each other beyond the most basic aspects. 

 

 

Wasn't there a sci-fi King Arthur (by theme, not name) movie at some point? The title escapes me, but I feel like there was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Camelot 3000 was a comic book futuristic version.  I also remember a cartoon from my misspent youth depicting Arthur and his knights as a sort of superhero team in powered armor.

"King Arthur and the Knights of Justice"

Edited by seneschal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, seneschal said:

(After reading "Avalon High" description)

Well ... ok then!  😳

<heh>

My youngest daughter (now 16) went through a brief period a few years ago where it was her favorite "Mom, Dad, you GOTTA watch this!" movie.  She probably watched it 10 times that month...  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...